Time to go

[Lord Kangana]

I think there is a lot of people trying to fudge the issue.

You are either confident Coyle will keep us up or not.

If you think he may not then SURELY to GOD we have to try and change? If you think he's taking us down then irrespective of "is there anyone better?" surely we've got to try something different?

I also think it doesn't come down to necessarily someone "better", but someone with the requisite skills for the situation we're in. Someone astute who can get us to fight our way out of it, someone who will send a team out and give them a chance rather than hamper them?

As a "while we're at it", the people who are saying "can we afford to replace the Manager" and "we're skint" probably need to weigh that against the loss of TV Revenue from £38m in the last Accounts to £16m which is the current parachute payment. I think I could replace a couple of managers for £22m

I thought you were meant to be good at maths.

Replace and pay off and still go down and that £22m is more like £30m.

Or are you guaranteeing success?

[Worthy4England]

I think there is a lot of people trying to fudge the issue.

You are either confident Coyle will keep us up or not.

If you think he may not then SURELY to GOD we have to try and change? If you think he's taking us down then irrespective of "is there anyone better?" surely we've got to try something different?

I also think it doesn't come down to necessarily someone "better", but someone with the requisite skills for the situation we're in. Someone astute who can get us to fight our way out of it, someone who will send a team out and give them a chance rather than hamper them?

As a "while we're at it", the people who are saying "can we afford to replace the Manager" and "we're skint" probably need to weigh that against the loss of TV Revenue from £38m in the last Accounts to £16m which is the current parachute payment. I think I could replace a couple of managers for £22m

I thought you were meant to be good at maths.

Replace and pay off and still go down and that £22m is more like £30m.

Or are you guaranteeing success?

No I'm not guaranteeing success.

Some of the £8m (not sure about that figure, but it'll do for now) should be recouped if you go down by having agreements with players that they take a pay cut in the event of us getting relegated. I doubt the pay cut would be that deep to make a significant dent in the larger number.

Where does the £8m figure come from to replace your Manager/Backroom staff etc?

[Lord Kangana]

From thin air. I think it represents a reasonable length of contract for new manager and staff, and a potential pay off for all those we're getting rid of.

What I'm trying to point out is that you are taking it from income for next season, but it would be expeniture this. Ergo, if we went down and had spent the money on a replacement, then not only would we have £22m less coming in, we'd have a higher debt carried over. Which I'm guessing would be in the form of yet another loan from Uncle Ted.

I'm also unsure if frankly we even have the means to take on more debt truth be told.

[BwfcDan]

Surely the vote should be reset - And again after the Everton match. That way we can see how folk's opinions change, fickle gits

[BWFC_Insane]

From thin air. I think it represents a reasonable length of contract for new manager and staff, and a potential pay off for all those we're getting rid of.

What I'm trying to point out is that you are taking it from income for next season, but it would be expeniture this. Ergo, if we went down and had spent the money on a replacement, then not only would we have £22m less coming in, we'd have a higher debt carried over. Which I'm guessing would be in the form of yet another loan from Uncle Ted.

I'm also unsure if frankly we even have the means to take on more debt truth be told.

Hence if we go down its 100% armageddon. Therefore we need to take every opportunity to avoid that.

For the past few years its been blatantly obvious that going down financially is just disastrous for us. Whilst we stay in the top league we can just about keep going thanks to Eddie Davies' help.

If we're going to go down anyways, I don't think the extra expenditure TRYING everything we can to stay up will be our biggest concern.

[Worthy4England]

From thin air. I think it represents a reasonable length of contract for new manager and staff, and a potential pay off for all those we're getting rid of.

What I'm trying to point out is that you are taking it from income for next season, but it would be expeniture this. Ergo, if we went down and had spent the money on a replacement, then not only would we have £22m less coming in, we'd have a higher debt carried over. Which I'm guessing would be in the form of yet another loan from Uncle Ted.

I'm also unsure if frankly we even have the means to take on more debt truth be told.

That's pretty much the gamble, do you spend £xm which would increase your total debt by 5% - assuming £8m was the figure - in the event you went down, to try and save 41% of your Revenue - knowing full well that your Revenue would probably take a hit elsewhere too (gate receipts, merchandising etc. etc.)

If you've got it, you probably do take that gamble, and if you haven't - well then you haven't and you can't.

But if we're assuming we haven't got that sort of cash, then there's little point having the debate in the first place.

[Lord Kangana]

BWFCi, effectively what you're proposing is a double or quits gamble.

Worthy...Now for the sake of argument (and rewinding the thread a little) you suggested, and I do agree, that Mark Hughes is a serious and viable option. But (and it is a pretty damn big one) we need Mark Hughes more than Mark Hughes needs BWFC. On that basis he wouldn't accept a 6 month contract with a relegation clause and no transfer kitty. What I'm guessing he would want is a gold-plated 3 year job, his own (sizeable) backroom team and a transfer "war chest". I'm guessing, but its a fairly confident guess.

The other option would be to go through the process but instead appoint an Ian Dowey figure, who would accept whatever we gave him, because as we all know you get what you pay for. It would still bring a cost, though much smaller than the first example. However, I'm not sure what, other than great upheavel, it would bring to the club in any positive way.

[Lord Kangana]

Ian Dowey being Ian Dowie's less illustrious cousin of course.

[Wandering Willy]

BWFCi, effectively what you're proposing is a double or quits gamble.

Worthy...Now for the sake of argument (and rewinding the thread a little) you suggested, and I do agree, that Mark Hughes is a serious and viable option. But (and it is a pretty damn big one) we need Mark Hughes more than Mark Hughes needs BWFC. On that basis he wouldn't accept a 6 month contract with a relegation clause and no transfer kitty. What I'm guessing he would want is a gold-plated 3 year job, his own (sizeable) backroom team and a transfer "war chest". I'm guessing, but its a fairly confident guess.

The other option would be to go through the process but instead appoint an Ian Dowey figure, who would accept whatever we gave him, because as we all know you get what you pay for. It would still bring a cost, though much smaller than the first example. However, I'm not sure what, other than great upheavel, it would bring to the club in any positive way.

That's probably a fair guess.

Based on precedent, Hughes was given unlimited funds in a January transfer window and with an arguably better squad to start with achieved 10th place.

If we're handing out sizeable war chests, chances are Coyle will fair just as well, if not better, than Hughes. But we're not, so it doesn't really matter.

[Worthy4England]

BWFCi, effectively what you're proposing is a double or quits gamble.

Worthy...Now for the sake of argument (and rewinding the thread a little) you suggested, and I do agree, that Mark Hughes is a serious and viable option. But (and it is a pretty damn big one) we need Mark Hughes more than Mark Hughes needs BWFC. On that basis he wouldn't accept a 6 month contract with a relegation clause and no transfer kitty. What I'm guessing he would want is a gold-plated 3 year job, his own (sizeable) backroom team and a transfer "war chest". I'm guessing, but its a fairly confident guess.

The other option would be to go through the process but instead appoint an Ian Dowey figure, who would accept whatever we gave him, because as we all know you get what you pay for. It would still bring a cost, though much smaller than the first example. However, I'm not sure what, other than great upheavel, it would bring to the club in any positive way.

That's probably a fair guess.

Based on precedent, Hughes was given unlimited funds in a January transfer window and with an arguably better squad to start with achieved 10th place.

If we're handing out sizeable war chests, chances are Coyle will fair just as well, if not better, than Hughes. But we're not, so it doesn't really matter.

You're being fairly selective - he finished 6th, 10th and 7th with Blackburn spending £ "bugger all" m. so your observations about City are hardly "precedent".

I happen to agree, to get Hughes would I think would be counted as a "coup", and I'm sure before jettisoning anyone, we'd make some discrete enquiries. Maybe similar with Martin O'Neil.

So we just say Owen Coyle is the best we can get, no matter how bad it gets, and stick with him regardless - can't see the Board letting that happen to be honest.

There does come a point where from an "upheavel" perspective, it becomes a non-problem, as not having any upheavel doesn't help you either.

[BWFC_Insane]

BWFCi, effectively what you're proposing is a double or quits gamble.

Worthy...Now for the sake of argument (and rewinding the thread a little) you suggested, and I do agree, that Mark Hughes is a serious and viable option. But (and it is a pretty damn big one) we need Mark Hughes more than Mark Hughes needs BWFC. On that basis he wouldn't accept a 6 month contract with a relegation clause and no transfer kitty. What I'm guessing he would want is a gold-plated 3 year job, his own (sizeable) backroom team and a transfer "war chest". I'm guessing, but its a fairly confident guess.

The other option would be to go through the process but instead appoint an Ian Dowey figure, who would accept whatever we gave him, because as we all know you get what you pay for. It would still bring a cost, though much smaller than the first example. However, I'm not sure what, other than great upheavel, it would bring to the club in any positive way.

I think what I'm saying is....

If we go down I can only imagine we'll be hitting the Administration reset button pretty soon anyways.

On that basis we may as well do everything we can to avoid that IMO.

Its as simple as that in my eyes. I don't think a manager till the end of the season and paying off Coyle and his backroom staff (IF it comes to that) is too much of a financial gamble given the £40M quid potential pay-off!

[CAPSLOCK]

If we're handing out sizeable war chests, chances are Coyle will fair just as well, if not better, than Hughes. But we're not, so it doesn't really matter.

Having had time to gauge the success/impact of his signings to date, what makes you think he'd spend well?

[Lord Kangana]

Its as simple as that in my eyes. I don't think a manager till the end of the season and paying off Coyle and his backroom staff (IF it comes to that) is too much of a financial gamble given the £40M quid potential pay-off!

I'd already addressed that issue here

The other option would be to go through the process but instead appoint an Ian Dowey figure, who would accept whatever we gave him, because as we all know you get what you pay for. It would still bring a cost, though much smaller than the first example. However, I'm not sure what, other than great upheavel, it would bring to the club in any positive way.

[Wandering Willy]

If we're handing out sizeable war chests, chances are Coyle will fair just as well, if not better, than Hughes. But we're not, so it doesn't really matter.

Having had time to gauge the success/impact of his signings to date, what makes you think he'd spend well?

Point taken Caps. though when you're in the bargain basement/free transfer end of the market some will work out, some won't.

Sharp contrast to spurting £95+ million on Robinho, Lescott, Jo, SWP and Roque Santa Cruz.

[Worthy4England]

If we're handing out sizeable war chests, chances are Coyle will fair just as well, if not better, than Hughes. But we're not, so it doesn't really matter.

Having had time to gauge the success/impact of his signings to date, what makes you think he'd spend well?

Point taken Caps. though when you're in the bargain basement/free transfer end of the market some will work out, some won't.

Sharp contrast to spurting £95+ million on Robinho, Lescott, Jo, SWP and Roque Santa Cruz.

Which is a sharp contrast to spending £8.5m and finishing 7th with a cup semi final thrown in. That's pretty much exactly the same as OC could have done on his £8.5m, had he finished 7th instead of 14th. But he didn't.

[Wandering Willy]

Very good. I assume you are referring to 4 years ago.

Given the hyper inflation in football fees since then I would think that relative transfer prices have increased two fold if not more, suggesting a comparison of the £8.5m is unfair at best and dulling the contrast somewhat.

[CAPSLOCK]

If we're handing out sizeable war chests, chances are Coyle will fair just as well, if not better, than Hughes. But we're not, so it doesn't really matter.

Having had time to gauge the success/impact of his signings to date, what makes you think he'd spend well?

Point taken Caps. though when you're in the bargain basement/free transfer end of the market some will work out, some won't.

Sharp contrast to spurting £95+ million on Robinho, Lescott, Jo, SWP and Roque Santa Cruz.

Thank God we aint got 95 million to spend

For once, being skint may be a blessing

We have a group of players crying out for organisation and some structure

It should not be beyond any bloke with the coaching badges Coyle has and an understanding that you have to counter the strengths of the opposition

[Worthy4England]

Very good. I assume you are referring to 4 years ago.

Given the hyper inflation in football fees since then I would think that relative transfer prices have increased two fold if not more, suggesting a comparison of the £8.5m is unfair at best and dulling the contrast somewhat.

Yes, but you are pointing to his norm being spend £95m and getting to 10th (although I'm not sure at what point in time that was - I thought they were higher when he got sacked).

I'm saying that is not precedent. He finished 6th, 10th and 7th with Blackburn spending sod all and I don't think spent huge amounts in his short stay at Fulham.

[Lord Kangana]

You can't escape inflation. Even if things were all equal, you're asking for a transfer budget twice that given to Coyle. Plus the replacement/payoff matrix costs.

My money (such as it is) is on it not happening because of the clubs money (such as it is) not being enough for that.

Are you confident that it will?

[BWFC_Insane]

Using Dowie as a veiled threat as to why we shouldn't sack Coyle doesn't wash. Same applies every time you change manager!